So that this section of the gospel is very searching. It brings up, one would judge, the whole question of

• “what participation is there between righteousness and lawlessness? or what fellowship of light with darkness? and what consent of Christ with Beliar, or what part for a believer along with an unbeliever?”, 2 Corinthians 6: 15.

• The Lord Jesus was speaking in the temple, a wonder-ful thing that He could stand in the temple and say,
  • “I am the light of the world” – not simply the light of Israel, but the light of the world.

• Divine light in its fulness was shining in the temple, and we see the sharp division between light and darkness.

• The light was shining in the One who could say, among other things, “a man who has spoken the truth to you”, verse 40.

• The Lord was there, a perfect Man, a Man who spoke the truth; He stresses His manhood, and His perfection in manhood.

• But then, the chapter closed with the assertion of His deity. So that the greatest light was shining in this chapter.

• There was the light of perfect manhood, teaching in the treasury, as it says in verse 20, “These words spoke he in the treasury, teaching in the temple”.

• How rich the treasury was at that moment. Jesus was there, everything precious to God found in His Person!

• So that there was the light of perfection in Man, but also the light of God shining; God was in His temple.

• Not only a perfect Man was there, but God was there. “Before Abraham was, I am”. The One who is “I am” had come to His temple, and the glory was filling the temple, yet the darkness was such that there was no eye to take it in.

The blind man is a sign, bearing on chapter 8. The Lord in grace performs this sign, if, by any means, the Pharisees might be saved.

• But He shows them by the sign that what hindered their vision was their state, and that the way to get vision, to see the glory that was shining in the temple, was to go and wash.

• The spittle, and the mud which he made, and put on the man’s eyes, refer back to the ministry of the previous chapter of the presentation in incarnation of the perfect manhood, and yet the deity, of Christ, “Before Abraham was, I am”, chapter 8: 58.

• As J.T. said, the mud, in a way, made the man blinder than ever, and that is the effect on the natural mind of the presentation of the perfect manhood and yet the deity of Christ; it makes men blinder than ever, more opposed than ever.

• So the Lord was, as it were, putting the mud on the eyes of the Pharisees in His ministry. The blind man was a sign of what the Lord had been doing. But if only they would wash, they would see.

A.J.G. So that there is the combination of the works of God – it says “that the works of God should be manifested in him” – but also of the moral element involved in the man being required to obey the word of the Lord, “Go wash”.

G.R.C. The works of God become manifested in a person who becomes obedient to divine command.

P.B. Has the word ‘sent’ any reference to Jesus as the sent One?

G.R.C. I think so. It is stressed all through this gospel. In chapter 8 He says “He that has sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, because I do always the things that are pleasing to him”, verse 29.

• He is there as the sent One, a Man sent from God, a Man who had spoken the truth to them; and how easy that should make obedience to us; the fact that “though he were Son, he learned obedience from the things which he suffered”, Hebrews 5: 8.

• From the time He took the body prepared for Him He was entirely at the disposal of His God and Father. The coming into that body was His own act, “Lo I come”.

• But having taken the body prepared He was here as the One under command; and that especially came to light after His baptism when He was sent out in service.

J.Hs. Does the feature of obedience in the blind man evidence the undoing of the works of the devil?

G.R.C. It is really the primary step; the glad tidings are presented for the obedience of faith among all the nations,

• and then the truth of the mystery was made known, according to Romans 16: 26, by command of the eternal God, for obedience of faith to all the nations.

• So that the whole truth is to be received on the principle of the obedience of faith.

L.A.C. Is it not remarkable that in the book of Nehemiah, where the enemy attempted to bring in the greatest possible form of admixture, we find that the walls of the pool of Siloam are repaired, chapter 3: 15?

G.R.C. In that chapter it speaks of the fountain-gate, and then the wall of the pool Shelah – or Siloam – and then in verse 16, “the pool that was made”.

• I think these things have a remarkable connection; there was the fountain-gate, and we have already spoken of the fountain.

• But then there was the pool of Siloam, which was, we understand, of moving water, not a stagnant pool; but then there was also the pool that was made.

• I believe the order in which things are put there, the pool of Siloam coming before the pool that was made, shows the great importance of being in the current of what the Spirit is saying at any given time.

• We are apt to go back to the pool that was made, which I think refers to past ministry; there is a vast pool that has been made, of very great value;
  • but then, past ministry, as we know, can even be used, if taken out of its setting, to negate what the Spirit is saying at any given time.

• The only way to get the real gain of past ministry is to be in the current of what the Spirit is saying now.

L.A.C. The waters of Shiloah are said to flow softly – Isaiah 8: 6 – but they were refused.

G.R.C. That is it; and that is what was happening with the Pharisees.

• How soft and gentle the ministry of the Lord had been, how gracious! “Grace and truth subsists through Jesus Christ”.

• In His words the waters of Shiloah, as we may say, flowed softly, but they were rejected, and His words in John 8 were, therefore, severe.

P.H.H. Does John speak uncompromisingly of certain elements like light and darkness, life and death; but does he also add, specially in the gospel, persons who are livingly in the flow of the Spirit?

• May we not perhaps rest in words about what is needed amongst us, whereas the persons would give examples of those who act on the ministry, and therefore themselves become a living testimony?

G.R.C. So that the signs today are in persons; this blind man was a sign.

• If the sign had been accepted it would have meant salvation to those the Lord had been speaking so faithfully to. But then, as you say, there are living signs today.

• There are some persons who say they cannot see certain things; they are blind, and cannot see what is current. They profess to accept past ministry, but they cannot see what is current.

• It is always the enemy’s effort to blind people to what is current. But there are those who are seeing, and how do they see? By way of purification.

P.H.H. It says in Isaiah again, “Behold, I and the children that Jehovah hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel, from Jehovah of hosts”, ch. 8: 18. Is that where the testimony is?

G.R.C. What a comfort it is that in all the conflicts there have been such; there have been persons we can fix our eyes on as models who help us into the truth.

–.H. Does Peter touch on this matter of obedience when he says “Having purified your souls by obedience to the truth”, 1 Peter 1: 22.

G.R.C. Quite so. We can see how this man’s soul was purified. What a pure vessel this blind man became!

A.P.A. J.N.D. says as to the end of chapter 8, ‘Oh Jesus, Jesus, what sort of subjection is this, that we owe to Thee?’

G.R.C. How easy subjection is when we get a view of the greatness of the Person! How could we be other than subject to Him who could say “Before Abraham was, I am”?

• You may remember too, that J.N.D., in that article, breaks out into a doxology, ‘Oh Jesus, Jesus, God Most High’.

L.L. It would draw out our affection that He should so present Himself as a Man?

G.R.C. And we have to remember that He is a Man. In Philippians 2 it says “taking his place in the likeness of men; and having been found in figure as a man”, verses 7 and 8.

• We need to see that scripture is very careful; the Holy Spirit is very careful in His statements. Scripture makes it very clear that Jesus is a Man, a perfect Man, a glorious Man, the Man Christ Jesus;
  • but it does not use the expression, which might be misconstrued, that ‘Jesus became a man’.

• That expression might imply that He had left the state of Deity, and simply become a Man. Scripture says that He became flesh, and that implies that His Person never changed.

• There was no leaving of the state of Deity, but He became flesh; He entered another condition.

• But having become flesh, such a Person as He must be absolutely perfect in the condition into which He came; and so we see in Him real and perfect Manhood.

E.A.K. Is that involved in the truth that the Lord Jesus was sent on earth? It is not correct that He was sent from heaven.

G.R.C. That enters into this matter. Scripture says that Christ Jesus came into the world, and then, in coming, it says,

• “Wherefore coming into the world he says, Sacrifice and offering thou willedst not; but thou hast prepared me a body”, Hebrews 10: 5.

• The Person was unchanged, but He accepted the body prepared, and came into human conditions, and both down here, and now as a glorified Man, He was and is perfect, the perfect Man.

• But He has never left the state of Deity, He has never ceased to be Who He is.

A.P.A. Does not the word “subsisting in the form of God”, Philippians 2: 6, go through in that way?

G.R.C. It says “subsisting in the form of God”. J.T. pointed out that scripture does not say He left the form of God.

• It says, “subsisting in the form of God, did not esteem it an object of rapine to be on an equality with God”, and we see that in this gospel.

• Here He was, a Man; He said in chapter 8: 40 “a man who has spoken the truth to you”, but, at the end He said “Before Abraham was, I am”.

• That is, He did not esteem it an object of rapine to be on an equality with God, and that marks the whole of this gospel.

• More than once the opposers attacked Him because they said He was making Himself equal with God. And it was not wrong for Him to do that, because He never ceased to be what He always was.

• But then it goes on to say in Philippians 2: 7, “taking his place in the likeness of men; and having been found in figure as a man”.

• One is only pointing this out that we might seek to think in terms of scripture, and to speak in terms of scripture.

A.W.G.T. Might it help to refer to verse 7 of Philippians 2, where it says “but emptied himself, taking a bondman’s form”?

• I think some have had difficulty about the simultaneous action that is referred to there, and perhaps a word would help.

G.R.C. We are in deep waters, and I cannot say much about it. I think the emptying of Himself may refer to the glory that belongs to Deity,

• because He asks the Father, in this gospel, to glorify Him with the glory which He had along with Himself before the world was. He was here in humiliation.

A.J.G. It is a question of learning to think in terms of scripture, and express ourselves in terms of scripture.

• It is quite clear, I think, that emptying Himself, whatever that involves, consisted in taking the bondman’s form. That is, it was simultaneous.

G.R.C. That is really the wonder of the matter, the bondman’s form, is it not? Because manhood in itself does not necessarily imply bondman’s form.

• But coming to do God’s will, and to be under command in every way, He took the bondman’s form.

Rem. J.N.D.’s note says “emptied himself by taking”.

A.P.A. Does it correspond with the fine flour, that there was nothing, that we call ‘self’ there?

G.R.C. It is perfection, perfect humanity, and mingled with oil, wholly energised by the Spirit. Wonderful contemplation, the perfect humanity of Christ!

E.I. J.N.D. said in 'Notes and Comments', that wherever you get the manhood of Jesus in scripture, His Person is always guarded.

G.R.C. So far as I have seen in scripture, it is most carefully guarded. The Spirit is most careful as to the birth of Christ.

• In Matthew 1: 20, the neuter is used “that which is begotten in her”, not ‘he who’. And the same in Luke 1: 35, “the holy thing”.

• How carefully, at every point, the Person of Christ is guarded in scripture!

P.H.H. So that we are always reminded that the deity of Christ is there, although it may not be expressed in a definite phrase.

• Here in this chapter – John 8 – it is, as you remark, the Man there, but He says Himself “I am”. Is not that the way things are put to help our minds?

• We are limited, we cannot think too much about the manhood of Jesus, and the deity of Jesus at the same time; but they are always very close together.

• Would the word “subsisting” in Philippians 2 help us? It is not simply ‘being’, being might be accidental in the proper use of the word,
  • but “subsisting” is not accidental, it is meant to convey something substantial and constant.

G.R.C. I thought that. One only brings these things forward so that we might exercise priestly care, as far as we are able

• – the Spirit would help us – in thinking and speaking of Christ; and in these passages the incarnation is brought before us in a remarkable way.

• In chapter 8: 6, “Jesus having stooped down, wrote with his finger on the ground”. I think that is usually connected with His incarnation, and what a stoop it was – this permanent writing!

• What has come out in the perfect humanity of Christ is permanent; it is not now a question of the law of Moses, although that stands in its own place, but it is what has been written in the perfect Manhood of Jesus.

E.J.H. In chapter 18: 5 the Lord Himself says “Whom seek ye ?” And they declared they were seeking a man, “Jesus the Nazaraean”. And He said “I am”. Twice over He said “I am”, and having said that, He allows Himself to be taken.

C.J.H.D. Do we not need to be in the highway of the fuller’s field, according to Isaiah 7: 3 before we can rightly consider the statement in verse 14, “the virgin shall conceive”, and then the title Immanuel given to Him. Is not there the purifying effect of the fuller’s field to be laid hold of by us?

G.R.C. And would it not be working out in these chapters, particularly in connection with the blind man?

C.J.H.D. They really refused the waters of Shiloah in chapter 8 of Isaiah because they had not faced the highway in the fuller’s field in chapter 7.

A.G.B. It says in verse 2, “He answered and said, A man called Jesus made mud and anointed mine eyes, and said to me, Go to Siloam and wash; and having gone and washed, I saw”. Is this a matter of light as to Christ, as to His Manhood and Deity?

G.R.C. We ought to look further at the way the incarnation is referred to in these scriptures. We have already remarked on the first stooping in verse 6.

• The second stooping and writing on the ground, no doubt refers to His death.

• But then you get a more forceful view of the incarnation in what the Lord does in chapter 9.
  • It says “Having said these things, he spat on the ground, and made mud of the spittle, and put the mud as ointment, on his eyes”.

J.O.T.D. Is it to be noted that the Spirit, in describing the incident, says “he put mud as ointment”, and the man says “A man called Jesus made mud and anointed mine eyes”?

• I am thinking of the anointing as suggesting that the man has got some sense of the majesty and dignity that has entered into this wonderful matter.

• If a Person beyond comprehension has taken such a lowly form, as may be implied in the expression “mud”, it has reached him in this gracious and dignified form as “ointment”, and he speaks of it as anointing.

G.R.C. You are thinking then that this refers to Jesus in His humiliation here.

J.O.T.D. I thought the mud would mean that. But the man catches up some idea, and some sense of the glory of the One that has come into that condition. He speaks of anointing.

A.J.G. Does that connect at all with the thought of Siloam – being sent? The man had to go as being sent, but I wondered whether he had to come to an apprehension of Jesus as sent.

G.R.C. I think the mud would suggest that, Jesus in humiliation here. John quotes Isaiah 12: 38, “Lord, who hath believed our report?” referring to Jesus in humiliation

• but it says in verse 41 “These things said Esaias because he saw his glory”. Esaias was one whose eyes were opened to behold His glory.

• But for others it was just mud, as it were, which only made, if anything, their blindness worse – Jesus in humiliation here.

W.S.S. The Lord says to Laodicea in Rev. 3: 18 “I counsel thee to buy of me … eye-salve that thou mayest see”. I was thinking of what you said as to the blind man, bearing on chapter 8 and the Pharisees.

G.R.C. The ministry of the Lord in chapter 8 is really illustrated in what He did here. In ch. 8 He was applying the mud to the eyes of the religious leaders;

• He presented Himself in all His perfection as a lowly Man here, the sent One, doing always the things that pleased His Father, but they saw no beauty in Him, as Isaiah said, that they should desire Him.

• To them it would be nothing more than mud, as we may say. They saw no beauty in the Man, and yet ‘His path of true perfection was light on all around’, if only they could have seen it.

• The Man that men did not appreciate at all – they despised Him – was the One who was the incarnate
  “I am”. That is like the spittle mixed with the mud

P.H.H. The man said, “having gone and washed, I saw”, verse 11. But in verse 15, “I washed, and I see”. Is it not a further work of God being manifested, the man had got on more?

G.R.C. His eyes being opened had in view that he should apprehend Jesus as He is, as at the end of the chapter, “dost thou believe on the Son of God?”

• And that title of Son of God involves His deity. As the Son of God He quickens. John 5: 25.

A.P.B. We can only rightly understand the humiliation of the Lord Jesus in manhood in the light of His death. It was only because of our state that He needed to be humiliated at all, and that really went on to its final conclusion in death.

G.R.C. I think that is where the acknowledgment of the need of washing comes in.

• If a man naturally was blind a doctor would send him to an eye specialist. It would be regarded as very absurd to send him to wash; and that is how men regard it.

• Men do not realise that the fact that they do not see things is because of their state. It is not that the eyes need operating on, it is the state that needs dealing with.

• When you think of what it meant to the blind man to go, what obedience meant to him, a blind man, finding his way to the pool of Siloam; how foolish he would appear in the eyes of those who might accost him on the way.

• What was he going to do? He was going to wash. They would say, ‘That will not do your blindness any good’.

• But then, that was just the thing that was needed; purification was needed, purification of his whole outlook, as we may say, on current ministry what the Lord had been saying.

W.S.S. Is it in your mind that the words “I see” should mark us characteristically?

G.R.C. Yes, he gradually sees more and more. First of all he says “He is a prophet”, and then he goes on to say that He is of God.

• He says to the Pharisees “we know that God does not hear sinners; but if any one be God-fearing and do his will, him he hears”. Then further, “If this man were not of God he would be able to do nothing”.

• So he is arriving at things, he is learning to distinguish and in the course of it he is getting free from all his old associations.

• That is what marks a man who is getting light from God, he is getting free from all his old associations by the faithfulness of his testimony.

A.J.G. It is just at that point that their animosity stirred to the full, when he shows them that he is testing things by reference to whether they are of God or not.

P.L. And “One thing I know, that, being blind before, now I see” – is that the ground he takes testimonially, that he witnesses as having seen

• and is he not confirmed in the sight of what is current, you might say, till he reaches the climax worshipfully?

• The Lord says when He challenges Him, “Thou hast both seen him, and he that speaks with thee is he. And he said, I believe, Lord: and he did him homage”.

• Would this sight, as in the stream of the softly flowing waters of current ministry, result for us, in the climax of all obedience, the spirit of worship?

G.R.C. Very good. So that he is really moving on in the current of the waters of Shiloah, and his apprehension is getting greater.

• If we are obedient and move in the current of the Spirit, our apprehension will become greater and greater until we get a clear view of the glory of the
  Son of God.

A.T.B. He went and washed, and came seeing. As he went on the great range of things that Jesus had brought in became more and more real to him.

• Can we not prove the truth of these scriptures ourselves? If we are subject to the word, and purification takes place, the Spirit would not keep anything back from us, would He?

G.R.C. That is what one has in mind – that we should prove these things for ourselves.

• This man proves that there is no mixture between light and darkness. He had got light, and he was true to his light, and it would not mix with the darkness;

• his natural relatives did not help him; and into whatever circle he came, because he had light, there was no affinity.
  • “What fellowship of light with darkness: and what consent of Christ with Beliar, or what part for a believer along with an unbeliever?”, 2 Corinthians 6: 14-15.

• If we wash in the pool of Siloam, and are moving along in the current of what the Spirit is giving, we have only to be true to the light, to find that light and darkness do not mix.

• I believe the most effective way of separation is to bear witness.

• One wonders whether if we faithfully bore witness to what we have seen and known, we should experience more what this man experienced; people would not want us in their associations.

• We are to separate from associations, but then people would not want us, they would be glad to see us go. As to this man, they cast him out.

J.Hs. You are thinking of the way he got clear of his neighbours, and the Jews, and the Pharisees, and his parents. He gets gradually clear from every link.

G.R.C. He got clear of his neighbours, as you say, and then the Pharisees; and we have to remember that he had been brought up to revere the Pharisees. It shows how his eyes were opened.

• The Pharisees were seeking to judge him, but he judged the Pharisees, he had a judgment of the whole religious system.

• He became separate from his neighbours, separate from the whole religious system, and from the leaders that he had been brought up to revere, and even from his parents. His parents wanted nothing to do with him, because they feared the Jews. So here was a man in true separation.

J.Hs. And simply on the basis of being true to the work of God in him.

–.S. He refers to the will of God; not only being God-fearing, but doing God’s will, “if anyone be God-fearing and do his will”. Is not that a remarkable testimony?

G.R.C. I would say that he was able to bear witness to Jesus as the One who did God’s will, because he was set for it now himself.

• This man had nothing else before him; a man called Jesus had opened his eyes, and his one concern was to be true to what he saw and what he knew.

• He knew, at this point, that a man called Jesus had opened his eyes, and he knew that though he was once blind, now he could see. He was gradually developing a right judgment of everything around him.

• He had had a wrong judgment of things, but now he is getting a right judgment; everything was becoming clear to him, and he was evidently set to go right through with no compromise.

L.A.C. In chapter 4 the question is asked, “Art thou greater than our father Jacob”, and in chapter 8 “Art thou greater than our father Abraham”, and in this chapter Moses is brought forward by the religious system as a rival.

• Do we find this man reaching Christ at last, as the unrivalled One in his eyes?

G.R.C. That is very fine. He is greater than Jacob, greater than Abraham, and greater than Moses.

J.A.P. The Lord says in verse 28, “When ye shall have lifted up the Son of man, then ye shall know that I am [he]”. Does not that have a bearing on making the mud?

G.R.C. Yes. And it is in the lifting up of the Son of man that the means of cleansing has come in. There would be no way for us to wash but for the precious death of Christ.

F.E.S. Is washing more than just getting clear of associations?

G.R.C. I think it is the recognition that our whole state is wrong.

• I think first of all, the washing here was not cleansing him from his associations, it was what was applied to himself, to his own eyes.

• I think it is a question of recognising that our whole state is wrong, and that until we judge ourselves, and are prepared to obey the Lord’s words, to obey the gospel, as we may say, we shall never see.

• All through John it is a question of we ourselves being purified in every way; and here it is a question of obedience, and learning to rely entirely on the Spirit as to our thoughts of Christ, especially the Person of Christ.

• We cannot afford to let our natural minds work for a moment. The natural mind is just blindness on this question.

J.O.T.D. John uses the title “unction” in his first epistle, referring to our need of the Spirit, so that our thoughts of Christ should be right and true.

F.E.S. And does the thought of washing involve the mind very particularly, our thoughts, not only of Christ, but our own importance, and how we tend to figure in everything?

G.R.C. That is the point in this aspect of cleansing; it is a question of judging the natural mind. It was the pride of the natural religious mind which made the Pharisees blind.

• They said, “we see”. That is the pride of the human mind; it takes the ground of seeing, and of being able to judge even God Himself. The human mind would put itself, in that way, above God.

A.W.G.T. You have referred to state. J.T. said that it was not the sin that outlawed a man or a woman in an assembly issue, but their state. That is manifested in the fact that they will not hear the assembly. Matthew 18: 17.

• (In our day, it is saints meeting in the light of the truth of the assembly. Ed.)

G.R.C. And what lies at the bottom of that is that they say “We see”. They take the ground of seeing, they know better than the assembly.

• The Lord says “now ye say, We see, your sin remains”.

• It is the pride of the natural mind, specially the religious mind, working in divine things, which says ‘We see, we have encompassed the truth, we are accepting nothing further’.

P.H.H. The reaction of this man is immediate, especially when it comes to the question raised by the Lord about believing on the Son of God.

• He has one question to be solved, “Who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him?” Does that show his state? He is a believing man characteristically, and then the Lord says
  • “Thou hast both seen him, and he that speaks with thee is he, And he said, I believe, Lord; and he did him homage”.

• Is the road quite clear now for the service of God – the worship of the Lord Jesus, and what else may be involved?

G.R.C. Yes, a dependent obedient man, one who has judged himself, and his own mind’s activities, is characteristically a seeing man;

• so that in what is presented to him, however great and unexpected it may be, he is ready; and that is the attitude we all would seek to be in, is it not, to be ready for what is presented?

P.H.H. He has judged himself, and in his testimony, he has really pronounced judgment on others, the Pharisees; and, in the end, he qualifies as a worshipper.

G.R.C. “He did him homage”.

P.L. And does he not form constitutionally what is to be characteristic of the company? His position here is pivotal.

• In this section the Spirit passes from the individual setting, to the collective, the flock being in mind in the next chapter.

• Does this man basically set up the two great thoughts of testimony in holy boldness, and the worship of God? Is that not the great thought to which we are collectively called – a united front in the testimony.

G.R.C. That is what I have in mind as to this section dealing with associations. There is the sharp division in chapter 8 of light and darkness.

• The Lord makes the sharp division, “Ye are of the devil, as your father”, there is to be no mixture, and it works out in chapter 9, that the man proves that there is no fellowship between light and darkness.

• Darkness will not have anything to do with him. And that will be so with us, if we are true to the light. Darkness will have nothing to do with us, we shall be cast out.

• But then, in this mixed state of affairs what we have around us, and the generally tolerant attitude, men may be prepared to go on with us, and so the call comes “Come out from the midst of them”.

• There is really no fellowship, there is no affinity, between light and darkness; this man finds himself outside of every association in which he had lived:
  • he is alone, and the Son of God finds him, and says “dost thou believe on the Son of God?” And he says “Lord, I believe” and he does Him homage.

• Then the Lord immediately brings in the flock – because there should not be a break in the chapters, as we know – after speaking to the Pharisees, and exposing them because of their pride.

• They were saying “we see”, whereas the blind man was the only one amongst them that did see. So the Lord speaks of the flock. Now the flock introduces our true associations;
  • the question is have we any collective associa-tions outside of the flock? I do not know of any that God recognises. There is one flock and one Shepherd.

• All outside the flock is darkness. Outside the flock there is unrighteousness, outside the flock there is Beliar, outside the flock, unbelievers.

• The man is brought into associations of life in the flock, one flock and one Shepherd, and the Shepherd is the Son of God. And He and His Father are one. What a wonderful thing to be in those associations!

• And from the flock develops the family, in chapter 11, and from the family develops the body and the assembly – although the terms are not mentioned – in chapter 13 onwards.

• So that our whole associations of life are developed from this point onwards. But we are not available for them, unless we have gone through experiences similar to those of the man in chapter 9.

E.A.E. Does Saul himself go through that experience in Acts 9, meeting Jesus on the Damascus road, and then the opening of his eyes, and the effect of that is that he preaches Jesus, that He is the Son of God?

G.R.C. The word according to Acts 22: 16 is “And now why lingerest thou? Arise and get baptised and have thy sins washed away”.

• There is no doubt Paul was true to his baptism, there is no doubt he found himself outside of every circle in which he had previously moved, there was no affinity now; he was a man who saw, and he had seen the Son of God.

G.R.D. Would you say more as to the man in chapter 9 getting clear of these associations because of his confessing Jesus in the various ways that he apprehended Him?

• It seems to me that that lies at the root of what is so vital for us, in being free from so many things in the world.

G.R.C. Do you not think that the only right way to get free from associations is to confess the Lord, to say clearly what we see and what we know, without any equivocation?

• And while we do it with a view to purifying ourselves, and separating from them, the effect of our saying those things will mean they do not want us.

• There will not be any difficulty about it, they will not want to retain us. In principle they will cast us out.

P.L. So that “he brought them forth … and there was not one feeble among their tribes”, Psalm 105: 37. And Egypt was well rid of them.

G.R.D. Through the help we have had recently as to the greatness of Divine Persons, and particularly the greatness of Christ and the Spirit, in Their mediatorial service here,

• is it quite understandable that things that we have gone on with in the past we now view differently, and should be exercised as to getting clear?

G.R.C. I believe we have hardly grasped the fact of God dwelling among us.

• We have thought of manifestations and visitations; and we have them, of course, in the way the Lord comes to us at the Supper.

• But have we grasped the great truth “I will dwell among them, and walk among them; and I will be their God, and they shall be to me a people”? 2 Corinthians 6: 16.

• The affections of God are so intense for the men who belong to Him, that He dwells among us now, in these mixed conditions, not waiting for eternity; He is among us all the time.

• Do you not think the Spirit would help us to grasp this truth, for I believe it is of all importance? God is dwelling permanently among us, God, the great and eternal God.

• That is the point in this gospel, “Where abidest thou ?” The Spirit, and the Son, and the Father – God, known, and dwelling among us.

• It is on that basis that the exhortation for purification and separation is made. God is among us.

• Oh, if only that laid hold of our hearts, how could we contemplate any mixture? How could we contemplate anything that is contrary to the holiness of God?

• There is no thought in John’s writings of a mixture. Light and darkness are as separate as they can be. The children of God and the children of the devil are as separate as they can be. Why do we mix them?

A.H.G. And in one sense, there is nothing new in that, because God divided the light from the darkness at the very outset.

• He called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. He stamped the proper character upon each at the very beginning.

G.R.C. He did. Israel was not to mix things. In garments, there was not to be two kinds of material; in sowing the field, there was not to be two kinds of seed; and the ox and the ass were never to be yoked together.

• We must not say, ‘It is all right to be yoked with the ass until he misbehaves himself’. That is not what scripture says. It says you do not yoke them together at all.

G.W.B. Is what you have just said supported by chapter 14: 23, “My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him”?

G.R.C. “If anyone love me, he will keep my word”. It is a very illuminating scripture, because that chapter shows that the Spirit abides with us forever. Even if we grieve Him He does not leave us; and how much we grieve Him!

• But we shall not know the presence of the Son and the Father if the Spirit is grieved.

• But if we have the Lord’s commandments and keep them, and if we love Him and keep His word, He says “my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our abode with him”.

• That is, you have the Father, the Son and the Spirit, abiding with such an one.

–.P. Do you think, if we are to be kept in the current of the ministry, we have to be prepared for the position suggested in Ezekiel 47, where it says

• “And he brought me out by the way of the gate northward, and led me round, outside, unto the gate … that looketh eastward”.

• Then we have the river, then it opens out the measurement of the river. There is the willingness to face the northward position first, then eastward.

G.R.C. The north would mean suffering, and this man was suffering. It is not a small matter to be cast out of every circle you have lived in.

L.A.C. J.B.S. refers to this man as being brought out of the solitude of night. Leviticus 21: 18 shows that a blind man is prohibited from approach to present the bread of his God. This man sees, is cast out, and becomes a worshipper.

G.R.C. So I think we might link up the woman of chapter 8 with the man of chapter 9. The Lord says to both “Go”.

• He says to the woman “Go and sin no more”. That is characteristic of this gospel and of the epistle. We are to sin no more. There is no need to, “every one begotten of God does not sin”, 1 John 5: 18.

• There is no need to sin if we learn to distinguish between what is born of the flesh and what is born of the Spirit, and to rely upon the indwelling Spirit.

• But then He says to this man “Go, wash”. On this line we come into the associations of life. The blind man, seeing things clearly, comes into new associations of life, and how wealthy they are!

I think, therefore, we might, for our purpose today, apply to our own times the 14th verse,

• “This is already the third time that Jesus had been manifested to the disciples, being risen from among the dead”;

• and I think we may regard the first two manifestations as foundational,
  • the first one relative to the assembly and the highest level of the truth,

  • the second to bring about what the Lord is seek-ing from each one of us personally, our personal appreciation of Him, “My Lord and my God”.

• I am not now applying that to Israel dispensationally, but in the light of ch. 20: 24, where it says that Thomas was one of the twelve.

• That means it is a foundational matter, and enters, in the way we are thinking now, into our dispensation.

• There is the assembly manifestation, and a personal manifestation, although the others were there; but it was particularly personal to Thomas, and we need to have our personal dealings with, and appreciation of, the Lord.
  • All that is foundational and belongs to the beginning of things, but continues, of course.

• But then this third time, as we are applying it, would refer specially to the time of the end, to days of recovery, in a collective sense. That is to say, these fish were all in the net, and they were great.

• And so it says in verse 4, “early morn already breaking, Jesus stood on the shore”. It would touch our hearts to think of that surely, “early morn already breaking”,
  • the morning just at hand, and the Lord coming in in this way in tender affection, so that there might be this recovery at the dawn of the morning.

–.P. Is this third manifestation of Himself to preserve the life mentioned in the last verse of chapter 20?

G.R.C. It would have in mind that, in these last days, we should enjoy life in His name. 2 Timothy speaks of life; the apostle says he was the “apostle of Jesus Christ by God’s will, according to promise of life, the life which is in Christ Jesus”.

E.J.H. John takes particular delight in calling attention to Peter in regard to his various adjustments. He speaks more about Peter, especially on the quality side, than the other gospel writers.

G.R.C. That is very encouraging, because in actuality Peter was the leader in the Acts, even as the Lord had intended.

• So that the dispensation began with a man leading who had been recovered; who had known what it was to deny the Lord, and then to fail in leadership.

• But it began with a man, who, through those very experiences, was thoroughly purified.

E.J.H. He has to be adjusted here, in that he says “I go to fish”. But is not the thought in John’s gospel, being sent, as in John 9 and John 20? In leadership he said “I am going”, and others go with him, but he was not sent.

G.R.C. That is very important. He does not say ‘I have been sent to fish’; he had had no word from the Lord.

• Whereas this gospel presents the Sent One; and shows that blessing comes on the line of obedience.

• And, as you say, the Lord says in chapter 20: 21, ‘‘as the Father sent me forth, I also send you”; and Peter was there when that was said.

• It shows that, if we have not faced the exercises that we have before us, the best of us can be led away. That which is born of the flesh is flesh.

• It may have seemed to Peter that some move was necessary at this time – the Lord was absent – and the Spirit had not come. Left to his own resources, he said, “I go”, but he had no word to go. How easily we can move like that!

P.H.H. Does it suggest also the great matter of influence; Peter, perhaps, not reckoning what an influence he would have in moving in an independent direction. Is that something we have had impressed upon us during the last two or three years?

G.R.C. Very much so. The more influential a man is, the more damage he does, if he goes on an independent line. The line he is on may seem quite right to the natural mind.

L.L. There are five named persons, and two un-named ones.

G.R.C. Quite so. He influenced other leaders, Thomas, Nathanael, well-known men, and even the sons of Zebedee. Think of men like that coming under a wrong lead! Who would have thought that John would have been among them? It just shows what can happen.

• J.N.D. said that the greater a man’s piety, the more damage he can do if he is on the wrong side in a matter of the truth.

W.S.S. Do you think the ever present tendency to revert to what is Jewish might be suggested in these names? Three names mentioned, Peter and Thomas and Nathanael were all distinctly connected with what is Jewish in the gospel, and

• I wondered if the lead Peter was giving might suggest that there always is a tendency to revert to what is Jewish and legal?

G.R.C. We have to watch the Galatian element all the time, in the way we apply the truth. We may have right principles, but apply them in a legal and harsh way, and an independent way.

• We have to wait for the camp of God to move. It is not for any locality to establish a set of rules of its own.

P.H.H. Did you say we have to wait for the camp of God? What do you mean by that reference, please?

G.R.C. In Numbers it is called four camps, but it is also called “the camp”. So the four would suggest the universality of it, but it is the great camp where God and His dwelling place is the centre.

• We sing “Our God the Centre is”, as a future idea, but Numbers shows it is also a present idea. God is the Centre of His people at the present time, for He is dwelling among them, and walking among them.

• And He does not depute to others responsibility to direct as to when the camp should move. It is entirely His own prerogative. Moses did not decide when the camp should move; the cloud moved, God Himself took the initiative.

• The priests, who were to be on the qui vive, were to sound the alarm, blow the trumpets, so that every eye should be on the cloud, and all should realise that the cloud was moving; but God Himself took the initiative.
  • Here Peter is taking the initiative, “I go to fish”, he says.

A.J.G. Is this all leading up to “Follow thou me”? Would that link with chapter 10 of this gospel, the shepherd’s voice for the whole flock, and they follow?

G.R.C. I wondered whether that word was the final touch of Peter’s purification in this chapter. How much adjustment he needed, and if he needed it, how much more do we need it.

• After all the Lord’s dealings with him he turned round and said “Lord, and what of this man?” It just shows what our hearts are like.

• So the Lord’s last words, in this gospel are, “Follow thou me”. That would be His final word to every one of us. It is a final touch which, if heeded, completes the purification.

E.A.K. The Lord’s parental relation with His disciples is so touchingly brought into this matter.

G.R.C. That is so remarkable. When all had gone astray, the Lord did not act harshly, as we are so prone to do with one another, but came to them and said, “Children”; and the note says the word expresses peculiar affection. “Children, have ye anything to eat?”

• A true parent, however much the children have gone astray, would never let them starve. But on these independent lines we have nothing to eat. Eating here would involve real fellowship.

• In Leviticus 11 we are told the animals that can be fed upon, and those that may not be fed upon. There are the clean fishes – we are dealing with fishes in this chapter – and it is a question of whom we can feed upon.

• We feed upon those we walk with, we cannot help it. That is why we should not walk with people who are unclean.

• But on the line of independency there is no real fellowship. If we go in advance of the movement of the camp, there is no real fellowship in that, there is no food in it.

G.R.D. What would save us from independency is what we have in chapter 10, “My sheep hear my voice”. Does that not have a universal bearing today?

• If we are all hearkening to the one voice, the Spirit’s voice in the ministry, we really are thinking one thing.

G.R.C. I am sure. So He led His people like a flock by the hand of Moses and Aaron. Aaron the priest would see to it that when the cloud moved, all the brethren knew it.

J.O.T.D. Would the references in John to the early morning fit in with current concern about the Lord’s day?

• Chapter 8: 2, “And early in the morning he came again into the temple”; and it was early in the morning when His sufferings began, as depicted in this gospel, and He was apprehended. And in chapter 20: 1, “Mary of Magdala comes in early morn to the tomb”, and here again, “And early morn already breaking”.

G.R.C. All that is very interesting.

A.G.B. Does not the movement suggest that there would be a constant expectancy that the testimony would move;

• the eye on the cloud, and the ear awaiting the sound of the trumpet, suggesting the sensibilities that would always be on the alert for some fresh movement on the part of God?

G.R.C. I think so. And if we are in the sense of being sent, we are here under direction; we do not know when the next command may come.

• And the most imperative command they had, in the camp of old, was God Himself moving.

• There were God’s commandments, which were to regulate them at all times, but what kept them on the alert would be the fact that God might move at any time, and they were to move at the command of Jehovah.

• How did Jehovah command them? By moving Himself. It was not for them to be left behind.

• What you say is of much importance, that we should have our eyes open, and our ears; and, as priests, we should be concerned that the alarm is heard in every part of the camp.

• There have been times of conflict in the past, when the trumpet may not have been sounded so universally as it might have been. That may be partly the reason for such heavy losses.

P.H.H. Verse 4 says “Jesus stood on the shore; the disciples however did not know that it was Jesus”.

• Was that one of the penalties, so to speak, of this false leadership, that they did not recognise the Lord when He was there? He was not a very great distance off, apparently just about a hundred yards. So that their sensibilities were very much blunted.

G.R.C. Do you not think that is the first thing that happens when we embark on anything independent? We lose our vision, and the alertness of our hearing. All our sensibilities, indeed, become weakened.

A.J.G. Without holiness none shall see the Lord.

A.H.G. Is it important that He manifested Himself? You have been bringing before us the glory of His Person. “After these things Jesus manifested himself”. Is that the point where recovery begins?

G.R.C. I am sure it is. And how affecting this manifestation was, that He should come and stand on the shore, and not a word of rebuke to begin with, but just “Children, have ye anything to eat?”.

• They knew they had nothing to eat, they knew they were on starvation diet on the course they were on. Then, as we know, when they do arrive at the shore, Jesus Himself had prepared the repast.

• It is very affecting, and I think we can see that it is the way the Lord has brought about recovery in these days – not by chiding, but by bringing us back to the consciousness of family affection.

E.J.H. Is not independency disruptive of family feelings?

G.R.C. It certainly is.

Ques. Would you say something as to the difference in the way in which John is referred to in verse 2, and verse 7? In verse 2 he is just one of the sons of Zebedee.

G.R.C. In verse 7 “That disciple therefore whom Jesus loved says to Peter, It is the Lord”. It may be he is described thus in verse 7 because his sensibilities had become alert; he was the first one recovered.

W.S.S. J.T. used to draw attention to the fact that the Lord said “Come and dine” – a very dignified suggestion – before He adjusts them.

G.R.C. That is very touching too. There was no probing of Peter until they had dined.

W.S.S. The Lord brought fish, and then He says “Bring of the fishes which ye have now taken”. There must be something special in that.

G.R.C. Their recovery was brought about in the first instance by obedience, although they did not recognise Him. He said to them “Cast the net at the right side of the ship and ye will find”. Though they were still blind as to Himself, they obey what He says.

E.I. Would there be any link between this chapter and chapter 6, where the feeding comes in, and quite a crowd of them move off, and the Lord raises the question as to whether they would go away, and Peter says “To whom shall we go”?

G.R.C. That seems to be somewhat different. The point here seems to be that they obeyed the word, although they had not recognised Jesus.

• They must have felt the fatherly touch, though they did not recognise yet that it was He. “Children, have ye anything to eat?”.

• And I think many of us have been affected by things in this way. A fatherly touch has come to us, it was from the Lord, but it came through those He used; and we have not realised, perhaps, in a direct way, that it was the Lord;
  • but there has been the fatherly touch, a sense of care for our souls, and it has led us to be prepared to give heed to the word.

• And so they acted, they cast the net at the right side of the ship, “and could no longer draw it from the multitude of fishes”. Now there are results, it is no longer a question of “have ye anything to eat?” They had got a multitude of fishes.

• You can see how this happened in the revival. The persons separating, in the early days especially, must have wondered whom they could have fellowship with; but the net has enclosed a multitude of fishes.
  • It may not be many in actual number, a hundred and fifty-three. But they are those available to walk with.

• The net has enclosed a multitude of fishes, so that we are not left alone, we follow righteousness, faith, love and peace with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart, and they are wonderful persons.

• Persons who have really passed through the exercises we have had before us are wonderful persons, they are great fishes. It is good to be in their company, and it is real food.

• We have to take account of the idea of feeding on one another. Fellowship is a matter of feeding. We can feed on the clean fishes.

A.T.B. Would “the early morn already breaking”, and “Jesus stood on the shore” have something to do with this? I take it the morn is in relation to that glorious Person coming in.

G.R.C. The sense that the coming of the Lord publicly is imminent was a main-spring in the present revival.

• The morn is about to break. But then Jesus Himself comes; and John is the first one who recognises Him – the disciple that Jesus loved. He says “It is the Lord”. It is a great thing when we recognise His present manifestations.

J.Hgs. Does the reference to “This is already the third time” suggest that the present period is characterised by the Lord’s manifestations?

G.R.C. The Lord does indicate in chapter 14 that He mani-fests Himself. It is a characteristic feature of the whole period – the whole period has been sustained by manifes-tations of the Lord.

• But these three are outstanding, two of them being foundational, which we should take full account of; and then this one being on the line of recovery.

G.R.D. Would you say that the Lord, in His dealings with us, on the line of recovery, has always in view to bring the assembly into prominence?

• I was thinking particularly of the days we are in, and the peculiar way assembly light and affections have been recovered.

• Whatever there may be in the way of departure through leaders or others, the line the Lord takes, in recovery, is to really make the assembly shine, and the personnel of the assembly come into greater prominence.

G.R.C. So that the net here did not break. Then as you say, the personnel are distinguished persons.

• I think in the light of this scripture, we ought to value one another very greatly, and we ought each to be exercised that we qualify for this, to be among what are called “great fishes”.

P.H.H. How far would you take the thought of what is fatherly in this exercise? Verse 5, “Children”. Would that element continue in the assembly as known to us practically now? It is the fatherhood of Jesus here; I suppose it continues in others, in a man like Paul.

G.R.C. I would say those who have helped us are those who have approached us on this line.

P.H.H. Does that ensure the affections, and the beginning of assembly affections?

G.R.C. I think so. We have been approached in a fatherly way, and we have had a touch of the family, and that is the way of recovery.

P.H.H. I was just thinking that, the family.

G.R.C. Yes. “By this shall all know that ye are disciples of mine, if ye have love amongst yourselves”, chapter 13: 35. In that chapter the Lord calls them children, and really His service there is parental. A father will do anything for his children. He washed their feet.

R.C. Is that the way Paul took matters up with the Corinthians?

G.R.C. He took matters up as a father. They were his beloved children. How affectionately he exhorted them!

–.S. Is it not Christ’s greatness and glory that He takes on such a diversity of positions?

G.R.C. It is in Him we learn fatherhood, “He that has seen me has seen the Father”, chapter 14: 9. Fatherhood is perfectly set out in the Lord.

• So that the fathers know him that is from the begin-ning; and I think it is the touch of fatherhood, and the family, that would impress all of us – specially, perhaps, those who have come into fellowship from outside.

• It is finding family conditions, which are not found around, that touches the heart and helps us to move in response to the word.

A.P.B. Would it not be part of a father’s love and vigilance for his children to see to matters that are not right? It is important that things should be done in a right way.

• It is not true fatherly care to let things drift, and not take them up, on the ground that we have got to feed people, and leave them to arrive at things themselves.

• People sometimes suggest that ‘we must not say anything to these brethren, they are only weak, and they have gone astray, let us just show them love, and feed them’, and so on.

• But the Lord, in His fatherly activities, while He acted in wonderful tenderness and grace, did take matters up. Recovery started from His doing something about it.

G.R.C. That is most important. He says “Come and dine”, but they were not very happy. It says “But none of the disciples dared inquire of Him, who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord”.

• There were things to be adjusted, and especially with Peter. Therefore, when they had dined, it says, “Jesus says to Simon”, and He begins to take things up.

• He takes them up with the leader, but in the presence of the others, so that all would be searched. If Peter was being searched, all were going to be searched to the very bottom.

–.G. This is a resurrection scene, the Lord is out of death. What does the shore mean? Were they not standing with Him on resurrection ground?

G.R.C. He was risen and they were in company with Him and they dined. How strengthened they must have been. But then the Lord begins to take matters up, and that is something that has to be done.

L.A.C. Is this the line on which we qualify for witness? J.B.S. said ‘We do not wish to be lecturers, but witnesses’. John refers to himself in verse 24 as a witness. I wondered if witness comes by way of this process of purification?

G.R.C. I think we are all tested by J.B.S.’s words, especially those who have a little part in the ministry. We speak a lot about these things, but what a pity if we are only lecturers.

• The thing is to be witnesses, and I do not see how one can be a true witness apart from purification. It is a real matter, beginning with John the baptist, in chapter 1.

• He was the witness that came to bear witness concerning the light, and what a witness he was! He made nothing of himself.

• First you get his witness concerning himself. And what was it? He would not claim to be anything but a voice, and not worthy to be a slave.

• But then you get his witness concerning Christ, and how much he can say of Christ. We need to be emptied of self, and to say much of Christ.

• But often we are afraid to say much of Christ because it will bring reproach – we shall lose our life in this world, and we are often not prepared for that.

W.S.S. Does the recovery here link with the saints being brought to the same appreciation of His people, as the Lord Himself, represented, on the one hand, in the fish, and on the other hand in the sheep and the lambs?

G.R.C. Quite so. The Lord is securing in these days great fish. They come out of the elements around, but in the very process of coming out, they become morally great.

• Peter was a sample in this chapter. He had been a leader, but now the Lord deals with him in the presence of the others. So this was a searching time for the whole company.

G.R.D. Is it the light of the recovery of the truth of the assembly that would bring into prominence the great value of our being together, and having everything in the light with one another?

G.R.C. It is. The Lord probed Peter to the very depths, but in the presence of his brethren, in the presence of those whom he had led astray. But how it would lay the basis for mutual love in the circle!

G.R.D. That is just what I was meaning. The recovery of assembly affections means that there is a sphere where adjustment can work out in that kind of love.

G.R.C. So while the Lord is probing Peter, it is not so much a question of what Peter says, and yet it is delightful when a brother who has sinned makes a public confession before all, spontaneously; it is most affecting.

A.T.B. Would you say something about Peter being used. It says, before He was adjusted, that “he went up and drew the net to land full of great fishes”.

G.R.C. He was obeying the word, he was an obedient man. The Lord says “Bring of the fishes which ye have now taken. Simon Peter went up and drew the net to the land full of great fishes”.

• He is under command, and at this point, through John’s help, he knows who it is that is commanding him. So that he is outwardly a recovered man. But now the Lord deals with him inwardly.

J.O.T.D. Is there any suggestion of there being a tinge of rivalry in regard of Peter’s love for the Lord? One would speak carefully about it, but the Lord says “lovest thou me more than these?”

G.R.C. That is what I thought. The Lord is searching Peter, on a feature of the flesh which is perhaps one of the last we learn to judge.

• Peter really loved the Lord, but he was marked by self-confidence in that devotion, there was mixed with it self-confidence, so that he says in chapter 13: 37, “I will lay down my life for thee”.

• And in this passage, the Lord is probing him, for he really thought that he loved the Lord more than the others. In Matthew 26: 33 he said “If all shall be offended in thee, I will never be offended”.

• In other words, Peter thought he was the best brother in the meeting, and that is one of the last things, I suppose, that dies with anyone of us.

• A great fish is a man who is so purified in that respect that he esteems the brethren as better than himself.

W.B.H. Less than the least, like Paul.

P.L. And that could be fed upon. They fell upon Paul’s neck and covered him with kisses. You were speaking of feeding on the fish.

G.R.C. Very good. What food and comfort brethren would get in seeing Paul, and his whole manner of life! What a delight to have fellowship with him in a practical way!

A.W.G.T. Would the secret lie in having an understanding of the greatness of the assembly, and every one in it? It would save us from these stupid ideas that we are something.

G.R.C. It would. Those stupid ideas mark that which is born of the flesh. “That which is born of flesh is flesh”, and it intrudes in these matters.

• There is real affection for Christ, but that which is born of the flesh gets mixed up with it, we allow the mixture, and thus think we are a bit better, more devoted, than other people.

A.J.G. If you take up feeding the lambs, and shepherding the sheep, it will help you, because you will not have much time to trouble about yourself.

G.R.C. That is very good.

E.J.H. In the ground that Peter took, was he not really seeking to glorify himself? But as a recovered and purified man, he is going to have his original desire in laying down his life, but he is going to do it then to glorify God, as Jesus did.

G.R.C. Very good. His motives were purified. No doubt he had the true desire, he said “I will lay down my life for thee”, and the Lord gave him the privilege, but not until he was purified. So that in doing it, self was not before him at all, but the glory of God.

P.H.H. Is there something in these words “know”, and “love”, which appear in this section?

• I am thinking particularly of the end of verse 17 “Lord, thou knowest all things” which apparently is conscious knowledge;

• but then “thou knowest that I am attached to thee”. Is that more what the Lord could see, objective knowledge. Was it now shining in Peter adjusted and purified?

G.R.C. That is very good. This three-fold probe had had a great effect on him, so that he could say “thou knowest” in the objective sense. There was that which the Lord could take account of.

P.H.H. So, as extending the matter, the brethren ought to be able to see that we do love the Lord, and we love the brethren.

G.R.C. And as we were reminded yesterday, the great point is to love the Lord in incorruption. It is remarkable it should be put that way.

• It does not suggest that persons may not love the Lord, but there may be a mixture. Peter had loved the Lord, but not in incorruption.

P.B. Is the Lord directing Peter’s attention to the idea of the flock? Is that where true love for the Lord is tested?

G.R.C. And the change from fish to sheep is interesting. There was the fish-gate, and the sheep-gate; the fish come out of the element of death, the corruption around, and it is in that exercise that saints become great fishes; but then, that is not the whole matter.

• Viewed as fishes we are persons still left in the old surroundings, but going against the stream, and “they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same sink of corruption”, 1 Peter 4: 4.

• So that “fishes” views the saints more on the line of Romans, and 1 Peter.

• But then there is another view of the saints, and that is “sheep”. And that has in view our collective relations as under the one Shepherd, who leads us into new surroundings – eternal life.

P.L. So that the hundred and fifty-three great fishes you could link on, by way of illustration, with the salutations to those eminent spiritual persons in Romans 16. They have come through all this element you refer to.

• And then shepherding the flock which He purchased with the blood of His own, what about that? Is that viewing the saints Ephesian-wise?

G.R.C. I would say so. And is not the flock an initial thought? Everything else in a collective, or corporate, sense springs out of that, for it says that Jacob served for a wife, and for a wife he kept sheep.

• So that the truth of the assembly as wife springs from the saints being fed and shepherded, as one flock. In John you have got the one flock, chapter 10, and the family, chapter 11. One thing merges into the other.

• If you have got the flock, then you will have the family, and then the body, the assembly, but you must have the flock initially. So it is
  • “shepherd the assembly of God, which he has purchased with the blood of his own”, and he speaks of the “flock wherein the Holy Spirit has set you as overseers”, Acts 20: 28.

• We never cease to be the flock, we never cease to need shepherd care. But then the higher truths are super-imposed on that, as it were.

• Having got the sheep, the Lord led them out, free from all other associations. All our associations are in the flock. It says the Lord leads them out, and they hear His voice, and they follow Him.

• So that we are moving together, flock-wise, and it is in that setting that the family can develop, according to chapter 11. Really John 11 illustrates the fact that no one can pluck the sheep out of His hand, and yet the setting there is a family.

• Death comes to take one of the sheep away, and you have the Father and the Son brought into that chapter, proving the truth of the Lord’s words that “none can pluck them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one”.

• So at the grave of Lazarus you have the Father and the Son as One, operating to rescue that sheep. It is a proof to us that not one of Christ’s sheep can perish.

• And then, as you move to chapter 13, you come to what, in Paul’s ministry, would be the body setting, and the assembly setting.

A.T.B. Do we see in Peter’s epistle, that he had come really into the good of all the probing? He says in chapter 5: 2, “shepherd the flock of God”.

G.R.C. How unselfish the service of a true shepherd is, it is not his flock. He says there “the flock of God”;

• and here the Lord says “Feed my lambs”, “Shepherd my sheep”, “Feed my sheep”.

• But how deep the probing went! The Lord had seen Peter alone over the matter of denial, and in that way, his personal relations with the Lord on that question were settled;
  • but the Lord opened the matter up here, in the presence of all the brethren, because he had made his statement in the presence of all the brethren.

• It was in the presence of all the brethren he had said “I will lay down my life for thee”. He had made that boast in real affection, but with self-confidence. Self was before him in a way which he would not understand at the time.

• In the presence of the brethren, according to Mark, he had said “Even if all should be offended, yet not I”. He was disparaging the brethren, as compared with himself.

• And so in the presence of the brethren, and those he had just led astray, this probing comes in, three times. “Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time” – not only that the Lord said it the third time – but because on the third time, the Lord drops down to his word.

• Up till then, the Lord had said “Lovest thou me?” the settled disposition of love, and Peter uses his own word “thou knowest that I am attached to thee”.

• But then the third time the Lord says “Art thou attached to me?” As though to say, You are not saying what I am saying, but is what you are saying even, really true? And that cut Peter to the very depth of his being.

M.H.T. In Nehemiah 3, in connection with the rebuilding of the wall, the first two gates mentioned are the sheep-gate, and the fish-gate;

• and of the sheep-gate it says “they hallowed it, and set up its doors”, and of the fish-gate it says “they laid its beams, and set up its doors, its locks and its bars”.

• In regard to the sheep-gate it records what the Lord says in the earlier chapter, that they may go in and out and find pasture, there is liberty.

• But is there a suggestion of certain restriction in regard to the fish-gate?

G.R.C. I think so. So that in Matthew 13 the fishermen sit down and deliberate. They put the good into vessels, and they cast the bad away. There are no bad fish here, all those caught are great fishes.

E.A.K. Therefore, could we bring into this chapter the thought of David recovering all, and David’s spoil?

• Is it not a greater matter, in the universal conflict, that we should have our eye on that which is David’s spoil, that which is connected with the assembly?

• In the light of the assembly, there is really nothing that the Lord has not recovered, “David recovered all”, 1 Samuel 30: 18.

G.R.C. So you mean that every feature proper to the assembly is recovered in these last days.

E.A.K. Yes. But do we not tend to be occupied with our side of matters, whether it is a local conflict, or what is universal?

• Do you not think the Spirit would help us to have our eye upon David’s spoil, what is for the Lord Jesus, what He gets for Himself out of it?

G.R.C. And how that would lead us, in incorrupt affections, to feed His lambs, shepherd His sheep, and feed His sheep!

E.J.H. What is the difference between feeding and shepherding?

G.R.C. He puts the shepherding first.

–.S. Would Psalm 78 help on that point, “he fed them according to the integrity of his heart” – feeding, and “led them by the skilfulness of his hands” verse 72 – leading?

E.J.H. Does shepherding suggest what we might speak of as arduous work? When Jacob takes it up he says of the actual shepherding, “Thus it was with me: in the day the heat consumed me, and the frost by night and my sleep fled from mine eyes”, Genesis 31: 40.

G.R.C. Much work is involved in shepherding – “shepherd the assembly of God”.That is the highest level of shepherding, and that is the great end in view in shepherding.

• Sheep need care and attention all the time, and from that standpoint we all need it. But it is in view of our learning our place in the family, our place in the body, and thus learning to function in the assembly.

• There is a great deal to be done, if sheep are to be so shepherded that the persons are fully functioning in the assembly.

A.J.G. So that in Ezekiel 34 the Lord speaks to the shepherds of Israel and says

• “The weak have ye not strengthened, nor have ye healed the sick, and have not bound up what was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought for that which was lost”, verse 4.

• Does not that give some idea of what is involved in shepherding?

G.R.C. It certainly does, and it is all arduous. How much we need help as to it!

A.P.B. Do not all those activities result in the flock being together in one place, where they can be fed?

G.R.C. The shepherding would have in mind that all the flock are together, and happily feeding in peace. And this is the proof of our love for Christ.

• Peter said he would lay down his life for Him, but having in mind that he would do more than others would do; but that motive is to go completely;

• the proof of love for Christ is feeding the lambs, shepherding the sheep and feeding the sheep – incorruptible affection for Christ.

E.I. David, the shepherd king, showed these features. At the end he said “I have sinned … but these sheep, what have they done?”, 2 Samuel 24: 17.

L.L. True affection for the saints would only be realised when we think how far the Lord has been for us – “Until he find it”.

G.R.C. And so the Lord goes on and we need to make way for the full probing. The Lord would probe us all as to whether we love Him in incorruption, that is Ephesian love.

• It was soon corrupted at Ephesus. Our affections can soon be corrupted. The probing brings out just that point, Do I love the Lord Jesus Christ in incorruption?

• Is there any mixture of self in it, anywhere? If so, I am not a fully purified man. And so how deep this probing goes with Peter, until there is this cry, this anguished cry, from his heart, “Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I am attached to thee”.

• He is not going to display it before anybody else again, so long as the Lord knows. “Thou knowest that I am attached to thee” – I will never say anything about it to anyone else again, but thou knowest it.

• And then the Lord goes on to speak of the death by which he would glorify God, that he would have his desire, he would die for the Lord, and he would glorify God in it. There would be no corruption in it. And having said this, He brings in this final word, “Follow me”.

F.P.S. What is the weakness seen in Peter asking about John?

G.R.C. I think it shows the fickleness of the human heart even to the last moment. We cannot trust our own hearts.

• After all this, and after being told how he would glorify God in his death, then it says, “Peter turning round”. What was he turning round for? The Lord had just said “Follow me”.

• His eye should have been on the Lord. “Peter turning round, sees the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also leaned at supper on his breast, and said, Lord, who is it that delivers thee up?” John was already following, the Lord had not had to tell him.

• Even though Peter turned round, why should he have raised the question? I believe it shows the fickleness of our hearts, and how we get our eyes on one another.

• Before we know where we are, we get occupied with one another, and what somebody else is doing, instead of just with a single eye and a pure heart following the Lord, and doing our part.

• He turns round to look at his brother. Now who of us cannot say that that is just what is natural to our hearts?

• But then, when he looks round he sees a man doing what the Lord had told him to do, “he sees the disciple whom Jesus loved following”. Well, that should have settled the matter any way.

G.R.D. In the assembly there is a great danger of our getting our eyes on one another because we are so near one another, whereas this section of the chapter stresses that the Lord retains direct links with each one of His own.

G.R.C. Yes, with every sheep. And it is specially important for those who, in any way, are influencing the brethren or giving a lead.

G.R.D. Would you say that probing is particularly the Lord’s prerogative?

G.R.C. It is the Lord’s prerogative, and He has His own way of doing it. I would think He may do it sometimes mediately now. He may use others to do it.

• I have been very much searched at times by words certain brothers have said to me; they have not known how much they searched me.

P.H.H. Do you see any reference to the breastplate here. According to Numbers the names and stones in the breastplate are according to their setting in the testimony.

• Is there a danger, perhaps unrecognised by us, to quarrel with where another man has been placed?

G.R.C. How many have gone astray on that account! They have turned round to see what someone else was doing. But then, he sees John following.

• I mean, John, at this time, was fully recovered, and he was already following. That should have been sufficient for Peter; the Lord had said to him “Follow me”, and he sees John following.

• How gladly he should have taken his place alongside John; we follow with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. And, of course, in Acts, Peter did take his place alongside of John, we see them following together.

• But here, it is a turn aside, he turned round, and then even though he sees John following he says, “What of this man?”

A.P.B. In what way is the Lord moving? Peter followed the Lord right through His earthly pathway. Now the Lord really was the ascending One, and how would he now follow Him? It would not be the few days the Lord would still be with them, would it?

G.R.C. I think it was the whole of Peter’s path in testimony.

A.P.B. And how can we follow the Lord in that sense? How does it apply to us?

G.R.C. He says “Follow thou me”. They are the Lord’s last words in this gospel. “Follow thou me” And that should come home to every one of us.

• I think it means that we maintain a single eye, and a pure heart. I believe a person who answers to this is a purified person;
  • he had the Lord alone as Object and Motive, and he finds others the same, calling on the Lord out of a pure heart, and he walks along with them.

• But not as occupied with what they are doing exactly; if we get occupied with what one another are doing, all sorts of rivalries may come in.

• But we are moving on together as calling on the Lord out of a pure heart, as I understand it.

A.J.G. And is the leading of the Lord discerned in the ministry that He gives?

G.R.C. I think it is. Does not the movement of the cloud enter into it?

E.A.K. Would the word in John 12: 26 fit in here, “If anyone serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there also shall be my servant”.

• Do we get the relationship of the servant with the Lord in the testimonial path, and then the intimacy that goes with it?

G.R.C. That is very good. And He adds “him shall the Father honour”.